At 8:43 PM -0800 2/6/02, Tim Bray wrote:
>to XML-SW, aside from the difficult question of what goes in
><?xml version="?", should in all respects conform to all the W3C
>recommendations that went into it.
>
I'm still reading through, but if this actually works as a pure
subset of XML 1.0, then we could keep version="1.0" and use a
processing instruction in the prolog to identify it as an XML-SW
document. It would be very nice if existing XML parsers could handle
XML-SW documents without updates.
--
+-----------------------+------------------------+-------------------+
| Elliotte Rusty Harold | elharo@metalab.unc.edu | Writer/Programmer |
+-----------------------+------------------------+-------------------+
| The XML Bible, 2nd Edition (Hungry Minds, 2001) |
| http://www.ibiblio.org/xml/books/bible2/ |
| http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ISBN=0764547607/cafeaulaitA/ |
+----------------------------------+---------------------------------+
| Read Cafe au Lait for Java News: http://www.cafeaulait.org/ |
| Read Cafe con Leche for XML News: http://www.ibiblio.org/xml/ |
+----------------------------------+---------------------------------+